Visual Outcomes and Safety of a Refractive Corneal Inlay for Presbyopia: One-Year Results.

PURPOSE: To determine the visual outcomes and safety 12 months after implantation of the Presbia Flexivue Microlens refractive corneal inlay. METHODS: In this prospective, non-randomized trial, 22 patients with a mean age of 52.54 ± 2.86 years were implanted with the Flexivue Microlens refractive corneal inlay in the non-dominant eye at the Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. Corrected near, intermediate, and distance (CNVA, CIVA, and CDVA) visual acuity and uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance (UNVA, UIVA, and UDVA) visual acuity, manifest refraction, subjective quality of vision, endothelial cell count, and contrast sensitivity were measured 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: For binocular CDVA, no patient lost two or more lines and 30% lost only one line at the 12-month visit. In the eye that had surgery, 85% of the patients lost two or more lines of UDVA, which was statistically significant. Sixty-five percent of the patients gained one or more lines in binocular UIVA, and 80% achieved 20/40 or better in DCIVA. UNVA showed a statistically significant improvement, with 90% of the patients achieving 20/40 or better 12 months after implantation. A total of 85% gained two or more lines in binocular UNVA. CONCLUSIONS: This refractive corneal inlay showed an improvement in binocular UNVA, UIVA, CNVA, and CIVA, whereas binocular CDVA and UDVA were not statistically affected. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(1):e1-e9.].

Anterior eye parameters and lens thickness measured by an intraoperative OCT and a swept-source OCT: comparison of hyperopic, emmetropic and myopic eyes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate if anterior chamber depth (ACD) and lens thickness (LT) measured by two different devices are affected by different eye lengths. METHODS: ACD and LT of 251 eyes (44 hyperopic, 60 myopic, 147 emmetropic) of 173 patients received with an iOCT-guided femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery (FLACS) and the IOL Master 700 were compared. RESULTS: ACD measured with the IOL Master 700 was -0.026 ± 0.125 mm smaller (p = 0.001) than that with the iOCT for all eye-groups (hyperopic: p = 0.601, emmetropic: p = 0.003; myopic: p = 0.094). However, differences in all groups were not clinically relevant. LT measurements (all eyes: -0.0642 ± 0.0504 mm) shows a statistically significant difference in all evaluated groups (p < 0.001). Only myopic eyes showed a clinically relevant difference in LT. CONCLUSION: The two devices show no clinically relevant differences in the eye-length groups (myopic, emmetropic, and hyperopic) for all ACD measurements. LT data shows a clinically relevant difference only for the group of myopic eyes.

Self-rated quality of vision and optical phenomena intensity of diffractive presbyopia-correcting IOLs: EDoF, trifocal vs panfocal.

PURPOSE: To investigate the self-rated quality of vision (SQV) and optical phenomena intensity of 3 diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (mIOLs). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Prospective comparative case series. METHODS: Patients who had bilateral implantation of a diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF), trifocal, or panfocal mIOL were assessed. Outcome parameters were SQV, symptom intensity of optical phenomena under 3 lighting conditions, quality of everyday lifestyle activities, spectacle independence (SI), and contrast sensitivity (CS). RESULTS: The study comprised 108 eyes. The 3 lenses provided good total SQV under all lighting conditions. EDoF patients reported a slightly better total SQV (EDoF: 9.8 ± 6.67, trifocal: 22.2 ± 7.09, panfocal: 19.6 ± 16.25 visual analog scale, P = .041). A similar percentage of patients reported the presence of optical phenomena with no difference between mIOLs ( P > .05). EDoF, trifocal, and panfocal patients rated symptom intensity of optical phenomena mild to moderate under all lighting conditions; however, EDoF patients reported a lower symptom intensity of halos ( P < .05). Reported quality of everyday lifestyle activities and CS were comparable ( P < .05). All panfocal and trifocal patients (100%) achieved complete SI, whereas almost half (44%) of the EDoF patients used reading spectacles. CONCLUSIONS: Diffractive EDoF, trifocal, and panfocal mIOLs provided good total SQV with mild to moderate intensity of optical phenomena under all lighting conditions. EDoF patients experienced the same percentage of optical phenomena but reported a weaker symptom intensity of halos and better night-driving ability. EDoF patients would all choose the same IOL, although a significant number of them needed reading spectacles, indicating that SI is not the main factor that determines patient selection of IOLs.

Visual and patient-reported factors leading to satisfaction after implantation of diffractive extended depth-of-focus and trifocal intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors that influence postoperative satisfaction in patients with diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) and multifocal intraocular lenses (mIOLs). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. DESIGN: Observational case study. METHODS: Patients were evaluated after implantation of a diffractive EDoF (Symfony, AT LARA) or trifocal/quadrifocal (AT LISAtri, Panoptix) 3 months postoperatively. A subjective refraction was performed, uncorrected and corrected visual acuities were tested for distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (at 60 cm and 80 cm, UIVA, DCIVA), and near (at 40 cm, UNVA, DCNVA). A test for contrast sensitivity was performed, and the patients filled 2 different questionnaires on daily activities and optical phenomena. Parameters with a potential correlation to the postoperative overall satisfaction were investigated. RESULTS: 94 patients with a mean age of 66 ± 19 years were included. Patients with a better UDVA and UIVA at 60 cm were more likely to choose the same IOL again. The intensity of subjective optical phenomena and the visual quality at different tasks of daily living influenced overall satisfaction. UIVA at 80 cm, UNVA, and corrected visual acuity demonstrated no significant influence on patient satisfaction. The uncorrected visual acuity at specific distances had a direct impact on the subjective visual quality regarding the task performed at those distances. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with diffractive EDoF and tri-/quadrifocal IOLs, the UDVA and UIVA at 60 cm seem to be more important than the UNVA and UIVA at 80 cm. Subjective visual quality and optical phenomena influence patient satisfaction, as well.

Intraoperative OCT vs Scheimpflug and swept-source OCT measurements for anterior eye parameters.

PURPOSE: To compare agreement of anterior segment parameter measurements using an intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) of a femtosecond laser (LenSx) during interface docking to the eye with preoperative Scheimpflug tomography (Pentacam AXL) and swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) (IOLMaster 700). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Retrospective study. METHODS: Anterior segment measurements were performed in mydriasis prior to surgery using Scheimpflug tomography and SS-OCT. Postoperatively, iOCT images were analyzed using a modification of the FIJI image-processing program. Outcome measures included external anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), and central lens thickness (LT). RESULTS: 95 eyes of 66 patients who underwent planned OCT guided femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery were included. The ACD measured with the iOCT was -0.011 ± 0.126 mm smaller (P = .389) than that with the SS-OCT and -0.059 ± 0.185 mm than with the Scheimpflug tomography (P = .003). The SS-OCT measured a -0.047 ± 0.146 mm smaller ACD than the Scheimpflug tomography (P = .002). The measurements of CCT using the iOCT and the Scheimpflug tomography (-0.705 ± 20.837 µm, P = .742) and the LT measurements using SS-OCT and iOCT (-0.050 ± 0.089 mm, P < .001) showed no clinically relevant difference. Only the ACD between the iOCT and the Scheimpflug tomography showed a clinically relevant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of the anterior segment parameters of iOCT with SS-OCT showed no clinically relevant differences regarding the ACD and the LT. However, Scheimpflug tomography vs iOCT measured a small clinically relevant difference for ACD. The iOCT showed no clinically relevant differences in anterior segment parameters compared with the SS-OCT. A small clinically relevant difference for ACD was found in comparison with that of a Scheimpflug device.

Nondiffractive wavefront-shaping extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens: visual performance and patient-reported outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual performance and patient-reported outcomes after bilateral implantation of a new nondiffractive wavefront-shaping extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Prospective, single-arm, single-center study. METHODS: Patient population: 16 patients (32 eyes) who received bilateral implantation of a nondiffractive wavefront-shaping EDoF IOL (AcrySof IQ Vivity) were included. Target refraction in both eyes was emmetropia. Observation procedure: Monocular and binocular uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected (DCVA) visual acuity (VA), refractive outcome, defocus curve, and contrast sensitivity (CS) were evaluated 3 months after surgery with a questionnaire on optical phenomena and spectacle independence. Main outcome measure: 3-month postoperative monocular and binocular UCVA and CDVA (logMAR), defocus curve, CS, and quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire results. RESULTS: 16 patients with 32 eyes were included. Mean spherical equivalent was -0.16 ± 0.37 diopters (D) 3 months postoperatively. Binocular uncorrected distance VA at distance, intermediate, and near was 0.01 ± 0.05 logMAR at 4 m, 0.05 ± 0.05 logMAR at 80 cm, 0.07 ± 0.06 logMAR at 66 cm, and 0.25 ± 0.11 logMAR at 40 cm, respectively. Despite some minor optical phenomena, 88% of patients would choose the same lens. 63% of patients reported no optical phenomena at all. CS was 1.25 ± 0.41 logCS (photopic), 0.96 ± 0.24 logCS (mesopic), and 0.93 ± 0.24 (mesopic + glare). CONCLUSIONS: This nondiffractive wavefront-shaping EDoF IOL provides good VA at far and intermediate distance and functional near VA. It showed good QoV and CS and high spectacle independence for distance and intermediate vision with significantly less optical phenomena than with other EDoF or multifocal IOLs.

Impact of Pseudoexfoliative Syndrome on Effective Lens Position, Anterior Chamber Depth Changes, and Visual Outcome After Cataract Surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the effective lens position (ELP), anterior chamber depth (ACD) changes, and visual outcomes in patients with and without pseudoexfoliation syndrome (PEX) after cataract surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, fellow-eye controlled clinical case series. METHODS: This prospective comparative case series enrolled 56 eyes of 56 consecutive patients with (n = 28) or without PEX (n = 28) and clinically significant cataract who underwent standard phacoemulsification and were implanted with single-piece acrylic posterior chamber intraocular lenses (IOLs). The primary outcome parameters were the ACD referring to the distance between the corneal anterior surface and the lens anterior surface, which is an indicator of the postoperative axial position of the IOL (the so-called ELP) and distance corrected visual acuity (DCVA). RESULTS: Before surgery, the ACD was 2.54 ± 0.42 mm in the PEX group and 2.53 ± 0.38 mm in the control group (p = 0.941). Postoperatively, the ACD was 4.29 ± 0.71 mm in the PEX group and 4.33 ± 0.72 mm in the normal group, respectively (p = 0.533). There was no significant difference in ACD changes between groups (PEX group: 1.75 ± 0.74 mm, control group: 1.81 ± 0.61 mm, p = 0.806) and DCVA pre- (p = 0.469) and postoperatively (PEX group: 0.11 ± 0.13 logMAR, control group: 0.09 ± 0.17 logMAR, p = 0.245) between groups. CONCLUSION: Preoperative and postoperative ACD, as an indicator of ELP, between PEX eyes and healthy eyes after cataract surgery showed no significant difference. Phacoemulsification induced similar changes in eyes with PEX compared to healthy eyes.

Presbyopia Correction in Astigmatic Eyes Using a Toric Trifocal Intraocular Lens With Quadrifocal Technology.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual performance after bilateral implantation of a toric diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a +2.17 diopters (D) (60 cm) intermediate and a +3.25 D (40 cm) addition (add) power. METHODS: This prospective single-arm study was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. Twenty-five patients (50 eyes) received bilateral implantation of the toric PanOptix IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix; Alcon Research LLC) before enrollment. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries excluding lens surgery and ocular pathologies or corneal abnormalities. Examination at 3 months postoperatively included manifest refraction; monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA) and distance-corrected (DCVA) visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 60, and 40 cm; and slit-lamp examination. At 3 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular defocus, binocular contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions, and optical phenomena, and spectacle independence were evaluated. RESULTS: Mean refractive spherical equivalent was 0.12 ± 0.380 D and mean refractive cylinder was -0.21 ± 0.237 D at 3 months postoperatively. A significant decrease in refractive cylinder was observed postoperatively (P < .05), with 98% showing a postoperative astigmatism below 0.75 D. Monocular UDVA was better than 0.14 logMAR in all distances. Binocular defocus curve showed peaks at 0.00 D (-0.09 logMAR) and -1.50 and -2.00 D (-0.02 and 0.00 logMAR). The worst values between far (4 m) and near (40 cm) distance were 0.04 logMAR at -1.00 D. Despite some optical phenomena, 92% of patients would choose the same IOL again and recommend it to others. CONCLUSIONS: The visual performance of the toric PanOptix IOL showed good visual acuity at all distances; more than 90% achieved a decrease of refractive cylinder below 0.75 D, high patient satisfaction despite some optical phenomena, and high spectacle independence 3 months postoperatively. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(10):638-644.].

Near visual acuity and patient-reported outcomes in presbyopic patients after bilateral multifocal aspheric laser in situ keratomileusis excimer laser surgery.

PURPOSE: To determine improvement of near visual acuity by bilateral multifocal aspheric laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) treatments in presbyopic patients. SETTING: Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized trial. METHODS: Thirty presbyopic patients underwent LASIK treatment with a multifocal aspheric ablation profile using an excimer laser (PresbyMAX). The first 15 patients received a multifocal aspheric ablation profile combined with micromonovision. For the consecutive 15 patients, less depth of focus was included on the distance eye (hybrid). Outcome parameters were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA); manifest refraction spherical equivalent; subjective quality of vision; and spectacle independence. RESULTS: The data of 29 patients were analyzed and showed that binocular CDVA changed from -0.16 ± 0.10 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) preoperatively to 0.05 ± 0.20 logMAR UDVA and -0.06 ± 0.14 logMAR CDVA (P = .000, P = .001) 1 year postoperatively. Near visual acuity improved from 0.47 ± 0.13 logMAR (DCNVA) and 0.48 ± 0.26 logMAR (UNVA) to 0.19 ± 0.19 logMAR (DCNVA, P < .001) and 0.05 ± 0.15 logMAR (UNVA, P < .001). The hybrid and the µ-monovision group did not differ statistically except for a better DCNVA in the µ-monovision patients (0.21 ± 0.15 logMAR vs 0.34 ± 0.17 logMAR, P = .034). Of the hybrid and µ-monovision patients, 21 (72%) and 12 (41%) had a binocular CDVA and UDVA of 20/20 or better, 8 patients (28%) lost 1 line, 3 (10%) lost 2 lines, 4 (14%) lost 3 lines, and 2 (7%) lost 4 lines of CDVA. CONCLUSIONS: The PresbyMAX laser seemed to satisfy most of the patients, although they experienced a loss of CDVA. The gain of near visual acuity and therefore reported less need of spectacles seemed to compensate for this loss.

Comparison of Femto-LASIK With Combined Accelerated Cross-linking to Femto-LASIK in High Myopic Eyes: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of femtosecond (fs) laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) combined with accelerated corneal cross-linking (LASIK Xtra) compared to conventional fs-LASIK (convLASIK) in high myopic patients. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, fellow-eye controlled clinical trial. METHODS: Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Germany. StudyPopulation: Twenty-six patients with high myopia and/or myopic astigmatism received randomized treatment with LASIK Xtra (30 mW/cm2, 90 seconds with continuous ultraviolet-A) in 1 eye and convLASIK in the other eye. MainOutcomeMeasures: Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), best spectacle-corrected VA (BSCVA), manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), endothelial cell count (ECC), and corneal thickness. RESULTS: The UDVA improved from 1.26 ± 0.13 logMAR preoperative to -0.02 ± 0.15logMAR in LASIK Xtra eyes and from 1.27 ± 0.12 logMAR to 0.01 ± 0.15 logMAR in the convLASIK eyes (P > .05). The MRSE changed from -7.35 ± 1.15 diopters (D) and -7.5 ± 1.12 D to -0.17 ± 0.43 D and -0.25 ± 0.46 D, respectively. There was no significant difference in outcomes between both groups during the 12 months follow-up except for the convLASIK eyes' showing slightly better BSCVA after 1 week (P < .05). ConvLASIK eyes revealed a nonsignificant trend toward myopic regression from 3 to 12 months postoperative with a change in MRSE of -0.15 D compared to -0.1 D in LASIK Xtra eyes. Topography showed stability of corneal curvature with no signs of keratectasia in both groups at 12 months. CONCLUSION: While apparently safe, LASIK Xtra showed no advantages over conventional LASIK. At 12 months, both groups showed no difference regarding UDVA and refractive stability, and no signs of keratectasia.

Defocus curves of 4 presbyopia-correcting IOL designs: Diffractive panfocal, diffractive trifocal, segmental refractive, and extended-depth-of-focus.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the defocus curves of 4 presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: Patients included in the study had bilateral surgery with implantation of diffractive panfocal, diffractive trifocal, segmental refractive (SegRef), or extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) presbyopia-correcting IOLs. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuities, distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA) and near (DCNVA) visual acuities, defocus curve, and spectacle independence were measured. RESULTS: The UDVA and CDVA were not significantly different between groups (P > .05); however, the EDOF group had worse near CDVA (P < .001). The trifocal and EDOF groups showed better DCIVA than the panfocal and SegRef group at 80 cm (P < .001); the EDOF and panfocal groups had comparable DCIVA at 60 cm (P > .05). Defocus curves showed no significant between-group differences from 4 m to 2 m (P > .05). The EDOF group had better visual acuity from 1 m to 67 cm than the trifocal and SegRef groups and better visual acuity than the panfocal group at 1 m (P > .05). Compared with the other IOLs, the panfocal IOL yielded significantly better visual acuity at 50 cm (P < .001) and the EDOF IOL worse visual acuity at 40 cm (P < .01). There was a significant difference in spectacle independence between the panfocal group and EDOF group (P < .05) but no difference between the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 IOLs provided equally good CDVA. The EDOF IOL yielded slightly better DCIVA but worse DCNVA than the other IOLs. Only the panfocal IOL gave better DCIVA at 50 cm.

Visual performance of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens for treatment selection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual performance of an extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) for patient selection. METHODS: This prospective non-comparative case series evaluated fifty-two eyes (26 patients) after bilateral implantation of the Tecnis Symfony IOL. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries, corneal astigmatism of >1.5 diopter, and ocular pathologies or corneal abnormalities. Uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected (DCVA) visual acuity (VA) in 4 m, 80 cm, 60 cm and 40 cm (logMAR), defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (CS) and a questionnaire on subjective quality of vision (QoV) were assessed after 3 months. RESULTS: UCVA was -0.02 ± 0.071 logMAR at 4 m, 0.01 ± 0.077 logMAR at 80 cm, 0.08 ± 0.187 logMAR at 60 cm and 0.22 ± 0.153 logMAR at 40 cm. Defocus curve testing showed a flat VA range from 0.00 to -1.50 D (-0.05-0.02 logMAR). At near distance from -2.0 to -2.5 D a dip of DCVA was observed (0.14-0.28 logMAR). CS under photopic and mesopic conditions without and with glare was 1.56 logCS, 0.86 logCS, 0.78 logCS, respectively. Spectacle independence was achieved in 100% for distance and intermediate vision and 71% of patients at near distance. CONCLUSION: This EDOF IOL provides excellent intermediate and far (<0.1 logMAR) and acceptable near UCVA (<0.3 logMAR). Defocus curve testing confirmed an EDOF between far and intermediate distance and showed a dip at near distance. It provides good QoV, CS, high spectacle independence, perception of few optical phenomena, and particularly good night-driving capabilities.

Comparison of a panfocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens after femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes of 2 diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs), a panfocal model and a trifocal model, after femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Prospective comparative case series. METHODS: This study comprised patients who had bilateral implantation of a Panoptix (panfocal) or AT LISA (trifocal) IOL. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgery, corneal astigmatism greater than 1.50 diopters, ocular pathology, and corneal abnormalities. Postoperative examinations included visual acuity at 4 m, 40 cm, 60 cm (panfocal), and 80 cm (trifocal); monocular distance-corrected defocus testing; and contrast sensitivity. A quality-of-vision questionnaire was also administered. RESULTS: The study comprised 80 patients. There was no significant difference in visual acuity (>0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) at any distance between the 2 IOLs (P > .05). The defocus curve of the panfocal IOL (0.01 logMAR) showed significantly better visual acuity at 50 cm compared with the trifocal IOL (0.16 logMAR) (P < .001). There was no significant between-group difference in the defocus curve at other distances (P > .05). The contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, and mesopic conditions with glare was similar between groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs provided excellent distance, intermediate, and near vision. The lenses appear to be equally good options for patients with intermediate vision needs at their preferred foci, while the panfocal IOL might be better for patients with closer vision requirements at 60 cm compared to the trifocal IOL at 80 cm. Both yielded high spectacle independence with comparable contrast sensitivity and high patient satisfaction, despite some optical phenomena.

Visual results after implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens in high myopes.

PURPOSE: To report visual and refractive outcomes after implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in highly myopic patients. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: This study included eyes with previous phacoemulsification and implantation of a trifocal IOL (AT LISA tri 839MP or 939MP) with an IOL power between 0.0 diopter (D) and 10.0 D. Postoperative outcomes at 3 months including uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected distance visual acuity, spherical equivalent, and refractive astigmatism were analyzed. Age-matched eyes after implantation of the same trifocal IOL with higher dioptric power (>10.0 D) served as controls. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes of 19 patients were included: 18 eyes (10 patients) in the highly myopic group (IOL power 0.0 to 10.0 D) and 18 eyes (9 patients) in the age-matched control group (IOL power >10.0 D). Three months postoperatively, the mean UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA in the highly myopic group were 0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) ± 0.08 (SD), 0.13 ± 0.09 logMAR, and 0.12 ± 0.07 logMAR, and -0.01 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.04 ± 0.10 logMAR, and 0.04 ± 0.11 logMAR in the control group, respectively (P = .022, P = .033, P = .053, respectively). CONCLUSION: Implantation of a trifocal IOL in highly myopic eyes with low IOL power (0.0 to 10.0 D) provided satisfactory short-term visual and refractive outcomes; however, results were not as good as those obtained in eyes with higher dioptric IOL power.

Visual Outcomes After Implantation of a Segmental Refractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens Following Cataract Surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual outcomes, with particular attention to intermediate visual acuity (VA), of a segmental refractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with optimized depth of focus (DoF). DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized, noncomparative case series. METHODS: Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Germany. Patient or Study Population: Fifty eyes (25 patients) were included. Inclusion criteria were bilateral cataract, age > 45 years, corneal astigmatism ≤ 0.75 diopter (D) postoperatively, pupil size 3-6 mm (mesopic), and center shift < 1 mm (Pentacam). Exclusion criteria were ocular surgeries, amblyopia, or potential postoperative distance-corrected VA (DCVA) > 0.3 logMAR. Intervention or Observation: Uncorrected (UCVA) and DCVA in 4 m, 80 cm, 40 cm; contrast sensitivity (CS); reading skills; defocus curve; and questionnaire on optical quality (OQ) and spectacle independence were assessed after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: UCVA and DCVA in 4 m, 80 cm, 40 cm; defocus curve. RESULTS: UCVA was 0.05 ± 0.122 logMAR at 4 m, 0.18 ± 0.164 logMAR at 80 cm, and 0.16 ± 0.140 logMAR at 40 cm. Defocus curve testing showed, respectively, a flat monocular and binocular VA range from 0.00 to -2.00 D (-0.03 to 0.11 logMAR, -0.05 to 0.05 logMAR). Median CS under photopic and mesopic conditions without and with glare was 1.81 logCS, 1.65 logCS, 1.52 logCS, and 1.14 logCS, respectively. Reading speed at 40 cm showed a reading acuity of 0.100 logRAD with 94 words/minute. CONCLUSION: This segmental multifocal IOL provides good VA at all distances (<0.20 logMAR), particularly providing good intermediate visual acuity and DoF. It showed good reading skills, OQ, and CS and high spectacle independence.

Visual Performance of a Quadrifocal (Trifocal) Intraocular Lens Following Removal of the Crystalline Lens.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual performance after implantation of a quadrifocal intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS: Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. STUDY POPULATION: Twenty-seven patients (54 eyes) received bilateral implantation of the PanOptix IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptixTM; Alcon Research, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) pre-enrollment. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries, corneal astigmatism of >1.5 diopter (D), ocular pathologies, or corneal abnormalities. Intervention or Observational Procedure(s): Postoperative examination at 3 months including manifest refraction; uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and distance-corrected visual acuity (DCVA) in 4 m, 80 cm, 60 cm, and 40 cm slit-lamp examination; defocus testing; contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic and mesopic conditions; and a questionnaire on subjective quality of vision, optical phenomena, and spectacle independence was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): At 3 months postoperatively, UCVA and DCVA in 4 m, 80 cm, 60 cm, and 40 cm (logMAR), defocus curves, CS, and quality-of-vision questionnaire results. RESULTS: Mean spherical equivalent was -0.04 ± 0.321 D 3 months postoperatively. Binocular UCVA at distance, intermediate (80 cm, 60 cm), and near was 0.00 ± 0.094 logMAR, 0.09 ± 0.107 logMAR, 0.00 ± 0.111 logMAR, and 0.01 ± 0.087 logMAR, respectively. Binocular defocus curve showed peaks with best visual acuity (VA) at 0.00 D (-0.07 logMAR) and -2.00 D (-0.02 logMAR). CONCLUSION: Visual performance of the PanOptix IOL showed good VA at all distances; particularly good intermediate VA (logMAR > 0.1), with best VA at 60 cm; and high patient satisfaction and spectacle independence 3 months postoperatively.

Comparison of 2 laser fragmentation patterns used in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of fragmentation patterns (pie pattern versus grid pattern) on effective phacoemulsification time (EPT). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Eyes that had femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery were included. One half of the group was treated with the pie pattern. The preoperative lens density was evaluated by Scheimpflug imaging (Pentacam). Then, the eyes treated with the grid pattern were matched to the pie-pattern group based on lens density (Scheimpflug imaging). RESULTS: The study comprised 150 eyes (75 in the pie-pattern group and 75 in the grid pattern group). The mean patient age was 66 years ± 10.67 (SD). The Scheimpflug density zone was 10.05% ± 1.52%. The mean EPT was 6.63 ± 5.41 seconds for the pie pattern, significantly higher than the 4.26 ± 6.99 seconds for the grid pattern (P < .01, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). The number of eyes with EPT = 0 was significantly higher with grid pattern (37 for grid versus 1 for pie, P < .01, χ2 test). Regression analysis showed that the EPT was significantly dependent on lens density for both methods (P = .045 for pie versus P < .01 for grid). In eyes with a lens density higher than 12% (9 eyes in each group), the pie pattern showed significantly lower EPT (P = .02, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). CONCLUSIONS: In cases of low to moderate lens density, grid fragmentation pattern should be used because the EPT was significantly lower and a significantly higher number of eyes did not require further emulsification. However, in eyes with high density (>12%), pie-pattern fragmentation is recommended.